"MazdaSpeed 3 sizzles"

I also wish that it looked different, but I think that almost every new car that costs under $60K, and many that cost well over $100K, look terrible. The 2000's are not a good time for car aesthetics in my opinion, especially cars like this that cost under $30K. Almost seven years in to this decade and the 1990's are still far ahead, again imho. I don't think this decade can possibly catch up in three years.

Pat

There is something to what you say, especially as far as Mazda is concerned. It seems they've settled on a design language that I just don't like that much. To me the old Miata looks better than the new one, and the Protege5 (my wife has one) looks better than the 3 that replaced it. But I don't doubt the newer cars are better in every other way. And I'd totally get the Mazdaspeed 3 if I was in the market for another car with more than two seats. If nothing else it has twice the horsepower. I bet it's a total blast for a front driver.

And not all new cars are bad looking. The Civic Si is very nice, much better than the old one. Infiniti G35 Coupe is really sharp. Neither of those are anywhere near 60K. There's lots of others out there.

I agree. Looks are not my number one criteria when choosing a car, and it is probably quite fun to drive.

Ok, I'll lower that figure, and I did say almost all cars. There are still a number of exceptions, just not that many to me until you get quite expensive. I have never liked the looks of any version of the Civic, but that is just to each their own. I do like how the Infiniti G35 looks, very nice.

Pat